Laserfiche WebLink
MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS <br />Meeting Minutes <br />June 10, 2026 <br /> <br /> <br />This lot is wholly located within Land Subject to Coast Storm Flowage (LSCSF). There <br />are currently five nonconformities on this property. The lot area is zero ft. because <br />it is completely in the flood zone even though the lot area is 11,550 sq. ft. The setback <br />from wetlands is zero because of the flood zone, the frontage is 105 ft. and less than <br />the 150 ft. requirements, and the front yard setback is 34.8 ft. where 40 ft. is <br />required. The structure coverage is currently 14.3%, which is 1,653 sq. ft. and <br />proposing 17.2% at 1,983 sq. ft. and is under the 20% lot coverage requirements. <br /> <br />This project was approved by the Conservation Commission. There are no new <br />nonconformities being created. <br /> <br />The site plan depicted the front yard setback at 34.8 ft. and will not increase because <br />the house is setback at 34.8 ft. Attorney Kirrane provided the Board with the <br />drainage calculations and photos of the neighborhood. He also provided a sketch <br />plan depicting the parking requirements. <br /> <br />Mr. Bonvie discussed the wording that includes “adequate parking” in both the <br />Written Finding (Section 174-17), and Special Permit (Section 174-17.1) <br />applications. The Board now requires that two parking spaces be depicted on a site <br />plan. If a garage is proposed that would provide adequate parking. <br /> <br />Mr. Reidy read the Conservation Department, and the Board of Health comments <br />into the record. <br /> <br />Mr. Morris will require the structure to be building code compliant. <br /> <br />Mr. Goldstein wanted to confirm the setbacks of the garage addition. Mr. Morris said <br />that the setbacks depiction is correct on the plan because the house is setback at <br />34.8, and the garage is further away at 36 ft. <br /> <br />There were no comments from the audience or the Board. <br /> <br />Mr. Bonvie asked for a motion to close the public hearing. Mr. Reidy so moved. Ms. <br />Sangeleer second. All were in favor. <br /> <br />Mr. Bonvie asked for a motion on the application. <br /> <br />Mr. Reidy made a motion that the Board approve the Written Finding application with <br />the following conditions: <br /> <br />1. The Board has determined that the applicant meets all the conditions of a <br />Special Permit under Mass General Law 40A Section 6. <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br /> <br />